Rob speak, you listen.
There is, of course, a far more recent (and bipartisan to boot!) example to choose: the aerial destruction of Iraq's critical infrastructure throughout the 1990s and the sanctions that prevented the reconstruction of, among other things, the water supply crucial to feeding a dry country. It was famously justified by the US government under Clinton as critical to the policy of regime change -- if the Iraqis wanted the sanctions to end, they needed to replace Saddam. The fact that tens of thousands of Iraqi children died over the decade was secondary at the time.
Of course, Iraq has since turned in to such a Hobbesian nightmare that most Iraqis would instantly prefer turning back the clock to the sanctions era. So Clinton's reputation on this issue might be salvaged by the awfulness that is his successor.